Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Is 5th edition really scheduled for 2008?

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/205581.page

Still on the front page.

Mike at Showcase has been told it's not coming in 2008, but Brimstone's usually extremely reliable.

No, it isn't. I'll take fries with that order.

Therion also seemed to have a bit of knowledge about it; may want to PM him.

Who knows since GW thinks it a good marketing strategy not to advertise their upcoming products. No wonder the company is doing bad. In any case, as far as rumours go, the most reliable sources who spread GW rumours online say it's coming summer 2008, so I'm pretty sure it is.

Given the consistent accuracy of the internet rumor engine, I'm willing to put a certain amount of faith in this one.

As an aside, can anybody name the last widely acknowledged rumor that turned out to be false?

As an aside, can anybody name the last widely acknowledged rumor that turned out to be false?

GW designers may write sloppy rules, but they do read web forums. Gav Thorpe himself replies to more important threads at The Warhammer Forum from time to time (although he always refuses to give official rulings). The studio always seems to know what the cheesiest army of the year is since they're so effective in nerfing all of the good stuff people have in their armies and forcing everyone to replace the old units with something nobody with half a brain had before. Do you think it is an accident Harlequins have tons of free veteran skills and abilities? Do you think it is an accident that Falcons dominate the skies? Do you think it was an accident Obliterators were gods of the battlefield in their previous incarnation? Do you think it was an accident the Assault Cannon frenzy started 3 and a half years ago? Don't worry, all of that will be nerfed soon or has been already. Then we can all go nuts about something else and spend some money. Most of the time if something is really overpowered, it's supposed to be. If something is horrendously underpowered, it's supposed to be that too.

What I'm saying is that if GW didn't want guys like Brimstone releasing all of the information 6 months ahead of time, they'd do something about it. They'd either silence the very well known guys who spread the rumours year after year, or their contacts. Brimstone is probably Gav Thorpe himself or some studio geek who gets told to start another feeding frenzy over at the biggest GW related forum on the internet. There's nothing wrong with this and many companies that make computer games operate the same way.

Therion wrote:
What I'm saying is that if GW didn't want guys like Brimstone releasing all of the information 6 months ahead of time, they'd do something about it. They'd either silence the very well known guys who spread the rumours year after year, or their contacts.

Hot damn!

GW Black Ops squads engaging in a little Wet Work!

Whoa!

The studio always seems to know what the cheesiest army of the year is since they're so effective in nerfing all of the good stuff people have in their armies and forcing everyone to replace the old units with something nobody with half a brain had before. Do you think it is an accident Harlequins have tons of free veteran skills and abilities? Do you think it is an accident that Falcons dominate the skies? Do you think it was an accident Obliterators were gods of the battlefield in their previous incarnation? Do you think it was an accident the Assault Cannon frenzy started 3 and a half years ago? Don't worry, all of that will be nerfed soon or has been already. Then we can all go nuts about something else and spend some money. Most of the time if something is really overpowered, it's supposed to be. If something is horrendously underpowered, it's supposed to be that too.

This consistently makes me laugh when it comes up. I would like to assume that when people say this, that they are being sarcastic, but often times they are not. If this was the true case, it would be quite apparent when they did it, and they wouldn't really have to hide behind anything to do it. Heck, why not make EVERYTHING the best, then you would have a really hard time not buying EVERYTHING, because it was all the best. I mean seriously, if you are going to come up with Grassy Knoll theories, they could be a lot better.

And yeah, all signs point to a summer/early fall 5th edition.

Dosadi made the last statement on Warseer about it

Leadership will be back in a big way in 5th edition. I think I've said this before already. There will be leadership modifiers for things like how many casualties you take from a given weapon; if you snipe down three guys then the pinning test would be made with a -3 modifier. Ordinance Barrage weapons give an additional -1 on top of any casualties incurred. Close Combat will have a resolution phase where you determine the winner by comparing the difference in kills with added bonus for outnumbering (go Orks and ‘Nids) and charging (I think). The result is the modifier to leadership checks by the looser. Fearless units just take the difference in wounds. So it’s not all that different than now, only faster and deadlier. This is a great improvement IMO.

With rumours coming up about a tactical movement (like a march move). Changes to vehicle rules(including something that might make falcons less survivable), a one table vehicle damage table, a change to rending, and changes to close combat. All little tweaks to the system, but supposedly no major changes.

Lets hope so. The game could really use some fresh air and more radical changes than from 3 to 4. Come next summer and I may even be able to play the occasional game.

Toreador wrote:With rumours coming up about a tactical movement (like a march move). Changes to vehicle rules(including something that might make falcons less survivable), a one table vehicle damage table, a change to rending, and changes to close combat. All little tweaks to the system, but supposedly no major changes.

a bit like the apocalypse super heavy damage table where modifiers are applied to the dice roll depending on type of hit?

To be honest, I don't thing 40k would be well-suited to big changes. For the most part, 40k seems to have settled down from a rules & mechanics standpoint. Cleanup tweaks would be well-appreciated.

The rumors all sound pretty good. I very much hope we get shooting modifiers to hit, a la fantasy.

Therion's right, guys. Come on, we all joke about how horrendously underpowered asscans were back in 3rd (and surprisingly not in 4th) but won't believe it applies to everything else? Everyone talks about how stupid GW is yet at the same time everyone agrees that they must have some smart businessmen up top or else GW would still be confined to small hobby stores.

This, in addition to my army theme, is why I'm buying more peasants and grail reliquae for my Brets and sold most of my pegasi already.

Heck, why not make EVERYTHING the best, then you would have a really hard time not buying EVERYTHING, because it was all the best

While the balance between uber- and sucky-units could be changed, construction of any game demands that not every unit can be the best. Even in Go, the first 5-6 stones are better than the rest. Nevermind that if everything was the best (therefore equal), you still wouldn't have to buy everything.

This consistently makes me laugh when it comes up. I would like to assume that when people say this, that they are being sarcastic, but often times they are not. If this was the true case, it would be quite apparent when they did it

If it hasn't been obvious for you I'm sorry but you need some help. Lash of Submission just slipped through playtesting? The Assault Cannon was a way to make sure people want the new Terminators and that the new Space Marines were the topic of the discussion everywhere. The Shock Troops rule was a way to make sure the fantastic Carnifex kit is a massive hit.

Like I said, I don't have a problem with GW intentionally making overpowered units, weapons or abilities to sell more models. It's been proven time after time that if an army book or codex doesn't have anything even remotely overpowered in it, it won't sell. GW made some huge mistakes with Codex: Black Templars and Codex: Dark Angels when they forgot to put the broken stuff in them, and now the company has a new CEO and half of the designers who were working on those books have been re-assigned to other duties.

This, in addition to my army theme, is why I'm buying more peasants and grail reliquae for my Brets and sold most of my pegasi already.

It's a reasonable assumption that Pegasus Knights will be nerfed hard, because that's what GW does to make you buy new models. It's debatable whether GW is daring enough to ban you from using some of your models. Sometimes they do it, but usually instead of forcing a strict 0-1 limit on Pegasus Knights and Obliterators, or taking Carnifexes back to Heavy Support only, they would just nerf them hard. That way they can say you can still use all of your models, but forget to add: If you want to play with a much weaker army than before.

Yep I'm only keeping around 6 pegasi, enough for a BSB (as if I'll use it again), a squad, and a general.

The studio always seems to know what the cheesiest army of the year is since they're so effective in nerfing all of the good stuff people have in their armies and forcing everyone to replace the old units with something nobody with half a brain had before. Do you think it is an accident Harlequins have tons of free veteran skills and abilities? Do you think it is an accident that Falcons dominate the skies? Do you think it was an accident Obliterators were gods of the battlefield in their previous incarnation? Do you think it was an accident the Assault Cannon frenzy started 3 and a half years ago? Don't worry, all of that will be nerfed soon or has been already. Then we can all go nuts about something else and spend some money. Most of the time if something is really overpowered, it's supposed to be. If something is horrendously underpowered, it's supposed to be that too.

This consistently makes me laugh when it comes up. I would like to assume that when people say this, that they are being sarcastic, but often times they are not. If this was the true case, it would be quite apparent when they did it, and they wouldn't really have to hide behind anything to do it. Heck, why not make EVERYTHING the best, then you would have a really hard time not buying EVERYTHING, because it was all the best. I mean seriously, if you are going to come up with Grassy Knoll theories, they could be a lot better.

Its not a weird conspiracy theory. It’s just a matter of how you express it. I don’t agree with Therion that certainly things are supposed to be “really overpowered” or “horrendously underpowered”, but the main premise seems accurate to me. GW does pay some attention to tournaments, forums, and sales figures, and is aware that certain things are too good or underpowered. They do deliberately chop down the power of a lot of stuff that’s “too” good (Oblits), and up the power of stuff that no one takes (Assault Cannons).

When 3rd ed came out, terminators had no invulnerable save, and plasmaguns and lascannons (which were even more common then) butchered them wholesale. No one took them, and a couple of years later, GW added the invulnerable save. They still didn’t get taken much in competitive armies, but later terminators (Grey Knights, Salamanders) were cheaper, or better, or both. The Assault Cannon was laughed at from 1998 (which 3rd ed came out) until its stats were revised in the current Codex: SM in spring of 2005. It was pathetic. 3 shots, no special rules, except that it could jam and destroy itself. Then it became a god gun, simultaneously resurrecting itself and the regular use of terminators. Rhinos were the core of every SM or CSM assault army all through 3rd ed. How to fight the Rhino Rush was one of the first tactics every competitive player had to learn. Then they got massively reduced in power in 4th (summer 04), to the extent that competitive players frequently dismissed or ignored them entirely. Now (starting with the new DA codex in spring 07), all the more recent codices make them cheaper and come with free gear.

The power see-saw or pendulum definitely exists. Whether you see it as GW trying to fix something and clumsily overdoing it, or as them deliberately overdoing it, is up to you. Either way it’s reasonable to conclude that there is a conscious effort on their part to change the balance of the game and drive the sales of stuff they improve.

Personally I tend to think it’s more of a clumsy execution of good intentions, based both on my impression of the GW folks I’ve met (like Jervis), and the way they do it (e.g. chopping Rhinos down in power about a year and a half after the current kit came out, or the Baal being released a year after Assault Cannons were made to suck, and languishing unused for six years). I’m certain that the Lash was intended to be badass, but based on how poorly and vaguely worded it is, I severely doubt that they looked at or tested it long enough to realize HOW badass it could be. Undoubtedly there were some additional conventions or restrictions on its use (say, all models move the exact distance rolled in the exact direction indicated, with no angling or alterations of course allowed) the way they played it in the studio, that they simply left out of the actual codex.

I agree with Mannahnin, in that this isn't a bizarre, GW-hating conspiracy. They freely acknowledge that rules drive minis sales, and that they are in the business of selling lots of minis. There are many examples of poor units getting good, quite a few examples of great units becoming poor, and very few examples of poor units staying poor in a new codex.

Certainly not every new model has amazing new rules (techmarine, biovores, etc) but it is not a coincidence that many new models get improved rules. And you know what? I'm glad! I'd rather see new models and fresh army builds on the table then be fighting rhino rush armies non-stop.

I can't remember who posted it but, assuming GW is intentionally making things cheesey/crappy, why not just make a balanced list? Why not have all portions of an army have a use and function? Why not keep rending AND make sniper weapons as rumored above? Would that be so horrible?

If GW is purposefully making these disparities then it just shows a pretty bad business model. All it has gotten them is a smaller market share and competitors that CAN compete.

ender502

Not necessarily. If everything is equally powerful, there is less incentive for people to buy new stuff. If part of their existing army gets downgraded, or a unit they didn't have before gets upgraded, they've got a good reason to change their army and pick up some new stuff.

Mannahnin wrote:Not necessarily. If everything is equally powerful, there is less incentive for people to buy new stuff. If part of their existing army gets downgraded, or a unit they didn't have before gets upgraded, they've got a good reason to change their army and pick up some new stuff.

And if every selection in an army is equally useful/usable (in generic play) but a bit more useful in specific situation (with possibilities for a counter, not a god-mode-unit that destroys everything) then that is an incentive for games to buy more stuff so they can surprise the other player with a new combination without each time feeling like something got downgraded because it was good just so that something else can be upgraded to god-more so it will be bought.

An more complex rock-paper-scissor if you want. They just have to keep three things in mind (from a high level design perspective): First the army list/theme with its pros/cons and, second, its units with their pros/cons have be validated with each other recursively as well as with other armies (third). They just need a very big piece of paper and organise all the armies on it. Of course then you have all the low level design to do (which I didn't mention) when the fundamental architecture for the armies and units is done. But this should not be that much different from normal army list creation except that they now would have guidelines that could help then create a balanced game. Although it could be that something like this is happening for fifth edition with how the recent army lists have been evolving (all the "simplified" lists).

They could have a lot of gamers that buy big parts of their (user's specific army) miniatures range because they need/want to stay competitive with the others who have bought a wider selection of units (and can create more flexible armies) or who just don't want to get bored with the same army list all the time. Of course that would reduce the army-list induced need to buy something but in exchange for that they could have customers who are not frustrated by the ups and downs of new army lists and still buy stuff. So instead of forcing you to buy something specific (for your army to be competitive) they could encourage you to buy more of all the different things hat the army list provides.

In addition to that happy people, for some strange reason, tend to spend more money on stuff they like (secondary armies for example).

Mannahnin: That post is not meant to be "against you", I just used your post as a starting point to jump into my rant against the upgrade/downgrade army list syndrome and it doesn't matter if the "designer conspiracy" is true or these "happy accidents" just happen rather often.

a 4 year gap between a new edition seems pretty soon. usually they go for 5 years, so i can completely understand a 09 release for 4th edition, but 08 just seems to be way to early.

Reasons for the sooner release of 5th Edition could include:

1. Boot to the rump for sales. A new edition would generate lots of excitement, would be pretty much a mandatory purchase for active players of the game, and increase sales.

2. Assist in the Codex Reboot Project. This will assist in the new gentler codexes project in that they now have an excuse to re-do all the codexes that they don't like. May have small tweaks that deal with only 1 heavy weapon per 10 squad members, things like that.

3. Well, that's it really, and I'm mostly banking on point 1.

I'm not entirely convinced that it's coming out in 2008, but it doesn't really matter to me either way. I'm not rushing to make my current rulebook obsolete.

Therion wrote:
. Brimstone is probably Gav Thorpe himself or some studio geek who gets told to start another feeding frenzy over at the biggest GW related forum on the internet.

I can assure you he isn't Mr. Thorpe or part of the design studio team at all. Honest.

whilst I broadly agree that certain items/units get a kick to make them harder etc etc, some of the time it's just dumb luck. Or just dumb. I'm reliably informed that Sammiel on jetbike had 2 special rules that were accidentally cut from his profile late : 1 let him shoot both his plasma cannon and stormbolters in the same turn and the other was just the simple IC status ( a theory supported by some of the strange behaviour seen otherwise in the WD battle report featuring him and the DA).

Although it is strange isn't it how newer units, with equally new shiny and expensive models get the best rules, like chaos possessed or Skyrays or... hnag on...

ender502 wrote:If GW is purposefully making these disparities then it just shows a pretty bad business model.

The opposite really.

If something is good, everyone buys 'it'. Once everyone has 'it', they stop buying 'it'. So, to keep selling things, GW has to make something else into 'it', so they make something else really good, and maybe make the previous 'it' not as good. Then, for the new 'it', they release a shiny new model, so people go out and buy 'it' all over again. Then when it comes time to re-do everything again, they go back to the previous 'it', but they put in a new vehicle accessory sprue and up the price by 10 bucks.

The only times that doesn't work is when there's a unit everyone loves and they can't get away with nerfing them. To do that, they just make 'it' into a better 'it', but do it in such a way that you have to buy the new shiny model. Case in point - plastic Stealth Suits. They couldn't nerf Stealths without angering Tau players. So they actually give them more options, but make those options only available on shiny new plastic models. So they become the new 'it', and the old Stealths become 'not it'.

If not for their falling profits, I'd say it was a pretty good idea, if insidious.

BYE

Therion wrote:

What I'm saying is that if GW didn't want guys like Brimstone releasing all of the information 6 months ahead of time, they'd do something about it. They'd either silence the very well known guys who spread the rumours year after year, or their contacts. Brimstone is probably Gav Thorpe himself or some studio geek who gets told to start another feeding frenzy over at the biggest GW related forum on the internet. There's nothing wrong with this and many companies that make computer games operate the same way.

Brimstone was fired from his GW job for letting out secrets. Unless he has contacts within the company who are passing him info, his store of knowledge will probably exhaust itself in a few months. I wouldn't take what he says as the gospel any longer.

Yup, good ol' planned obsolescence has been a staple of the business industry ever since companies started selling long-term use product. It's not even insidious, really, it's just necessary for companies to keep themselves profitable (which they have to if they're publicly shared, which GW is).

Take Apple for instance. They came out with an iPod at first with a monotone screen and people bought it. Later it had a colour screen, advertised as being able to display photos and people bought that. Now, at that point, the things could easily have played video as well with a little software, but they didn't. A year or so later, they came out with the iPod video and it sold like hotcakes.

The technology for a portable colour LCD screen had been around since the Sega Gamegear, but by releasing small upgrades in stages they were able to keep on going profit-wise even though you only really ever have a use for just one iPod.

Same thing with GW, they're legally obligated to remain profitable but if they never change the game balance then you'd only ever have a need to buy one army. So every 4-6 years they change the balance of units in each army to favour different sales, or they'll change the models/outfit of a certain unit. Makes sense to me, and without that process we'd all be playing with 2nd ed statue marines and Guardians with catapults counting as lasguns.

Their falling profits could take an essay to try to describe, but suffice it to say that around when 4th came out and they took the stance of 'we'd rather entice new players coming into the game rather than support veteran gamers who don't buy anything' while simultaneously pricing their model range out of reach of the average 13 year old's allowance. When they raised infantry boxes and blisters by 50% in Canada is when sales at my store really dropped off.

General Hobbs wrote:
Brimstone was fired from his GW job for letting out secrets. Unless he has contacts within the company who are passing him info, his store of knowledge will probably exhaust itself in a few months. I wouldn't take what he says as the gospel any longer.

*Blink*

Therion wrote:

As an aside, can anybody name the last widely acknowledged rumor that turned out to be false?

If we believed the rumors, then plastic drop pods would have been released about five times in the last five years

I am still wondering what model the Lash is suppose to help sell....

I think it is more accident than not. I do imagine that when they do make a new model they look at that time at it to see if it is operating or doing what they need it to. The one thing that drives sales more than good units is just good models. If I would have been satisfied with the look of my models, there really wouldn't be any reason at all to change out any of my early 90's eldar and marines. They didn't make me buy mounds of anything. I had almost every model I needed. What they did do is make much much better figs and models. They make new things, people will buy them.

The Chaos codex would be a horrible example of new models = greater sales. What new models are exactly so great in the list that I must by the new models? Same with Dark Angels. The only thing making me buy anything but Sammael is the coolness factor and new bits. Ravenwing didn't suddenly become all powerful because a new box set came out. I don't really think there are really that many examples of new models = powerful rules. I think it is more coincidence. They come out with a new model, give it some near rule, and sometimes it comes out powerful.